Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bdview24.com

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 19:20, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bdview24.com

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Adam9007 (talk) 18:23, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unnotable, couldn't find anything but social media accounts bearing the same name and some statistics about the web page. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 18:43, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete When the page was first created I had tagged it for a CSD under the guises of a non-notable webpage. The claim of a high Alexa rating is dubious (see here:[1]) as in Bangladesh alone it's not even in the top 200. RickinBaltimore (talk) 21:11, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as advertising without any encyclopedic value, based on the website's registrant email of record and the fact that the article's patently false claims are disproven simply by clicking on the sole cited source. Worldbruce (talk) 05:18, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I have found nothing to support the article's claims or to indicate attained encyclopaedic notability. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:NWEB, WP:GNG. AllyD (talk) 09:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.